IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
V. D. Bhargava, J.
WASIM AHMED KHAN - Appellant
Versus
SECRETARY, BOARD OF HIGH SCHOOL, INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION, U.P.ALLAHABAD - Respondents
Civil Misc. Writ 2970 Of 1958
Decided On : 03/25/1960
WRIT PETITION - BOARD OF HIGH SCHOOL AND INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION - ACT-SECTION REFERRED: ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION - SUMMARY: Petitioner, a student, challenged the Board's decision to withhold his Intermediate examination results due to alleged copying. The court held that the Board had jurisdiction to investigate and punish misconduct, and that the petitioner had been given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself. The court also rejected the argument that the lack of a definition of "misconduct" violated Article 14 of the Constitution.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, a student of St. Thomas Inter College, appeared for the Intermediate examination conducted by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education. His results were withheld due to alleged copying. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the Board's decision.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Board had jurisdiction to investigate and punish misconduct, and that the petitioner had been given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself. The court also rejected the argument that the lack of a definition of "misconduct" violated Article 14 of the Constitution.
Issues: 1. Whether the Board had jurisdiction to investigate and punish misconduct? 2. Whether the petitioner had been given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself? 3. Whether the lack of a definition of "misconduct" violated Article 14 of the Constitution?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the Board had jurisdiction to investigate and punish misconduct, as it is an autonomous educational body. 2. The court held that the petitioner had been given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself, as he was allowed to submit an explanation and answer questions related to the alleged misconduct. 3. The court held that the lack of a definition of "misconduct" did not violate Article 14 of the Constitution, as it is impossible to provide an exhaustive definition of misconduct and the Board's interpretation was not arbitrary.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition with costs.
( 1 ) THIS is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by Wasim Ahmad Khan against the Secretary, Board of High School and Intermediate Education and the Board of High school and Intermediate Education.
( 2 ) THE petitioner claims that he was a student of St. Thomas Inter College, Shahganj, district jaun- pur, which is a private institution and which coaches students upto Intermediate classes. The petitioner appeared for the Intermediate examination and his centre was at Gandhi Smarak intermediate College, Samodhpur, district Jaunpur. His roll number was 38463. At the said centre it is said that about 200 students were appearing in the Intermediate examination. According to the petitioner the teaching of St. Thomas Inter College was conducted by very experienced and excellent teachers and the students were prepared by the said College in an excellent manner. There were certain questions in Mathematics and Chemistry which were considered to be more important by the teachers of the institution and about 20 students of the said institution, who had taken Science, were told that certain set cf questions were very important and special attention had been given by the teachers of the said institution in respect of a certain class of questions. On the 1st of April 1958 Chemistry II paper for the petitioner and the other class-mates was held and some of the expected questions came in the examination. Likewise the examination of mathematics II paper was held on the 9th of April. 1958 and in that examination also some of the questions that were expected came in the papers. The 20 students of St. Thomas Inter College were being examined in gandhi Smarak Intermediate College, Samodhpur centre and the said centre had its own invigilators and they had made seating arrangements of their own. The petitioner had done his paper very well as the staff of St. Thomas was very excellent and there was fine coaching and the results of this institution had been very excellent. When the results were published in the Amrit Bazar Patrika on the 17th of June 1958 the results of the 20 students of Intermediate Classes of St. Thomas Inter College were withheld and a note was appended, by which they were directed to apply to the Secretary at once to know the exact nature of charges. They were also asked to explain their conduct and submit an explanation within 15 days. The petitioner applied to the Secretary for the charges but the same were not furnished. On the 17th of July 1958 an Enquiry Committee came to Gandhi Smarak Intermediate College and the petitioner was also informed. The petitioner asked for charges but was not given (sic) for reply. They were required to answer the questions within two minutes. The petitioner answered that there was no copying done and the answer book of other candidates were not shown to him. He has been held guilty of having copied from the answer-book of other candidates and so also the other 20 students of the college.
( 3 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner he was not given a reasonable opportunity to meet the charges and the Board of High School and Intermediate Education is not authorised to make any enquiry, and, in any event, is not authorised to punish the candidates for misconduct. No definition of misconduct has been given in any of the rules of the Regulations or under the Code and, therefore, it is hit by Article 14 of the Constitution, because it would depend on the vagaries of the Enquiring Committee or the Examiners.
( 4 ) ON behalf of the respondents two counter affidavits have been filed, one by Sri B. N. Kar, who had conducted the enquiry and the other by the Additional Deputy Secretary (Litigation) of the. Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U. P. It has been controverted in the counter affidavit that reasonable opportunity had not been given. Along with the counter affidavit the questions that had been put to the petitioner and his answers have also been enclos
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.